ARTICLES ABOUT EMISSIONS BY DATE - PAGE 3

Maryland's Democratic office-holders joined environmentalists in praising the Obama administration's announcement Friday that it is moving to curb carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants. Gov. Martin O'Malley issued a statement in support of the regulation issued by the Environmental Protection Agency , which would impose limits on carbon emitted by new power plants. He noted that existing power plants account for 34 percent of the nation's climate-altering greenhouse gas emissions, the largest source.

I was sorry to learn that special interest groups are looking out for themselves with total disregard for the nation's best interests as they seek to undo former President George W. Bush's major piece of climate change legislation, the Renewable Fuel Standards Act ( "How Big Poultry sided with Big Oil," Sept. 11). However, the Renewable Fuel Standards Act will only reduce vehicular emissions, and only by a relatively small amount. What we really need is legislation that will motivate all industries across the economy and around the world to reduce emissions.

The dog days of summer are upon us, and most Marylanders are more inclined to reach for beach-friendly paperbacks than a 265-page treatise on climate change. That's a shame, because the latest effort to address greenhouse gas emissions in Maryland - an ambitious plan released last week by Gov. Martin O'Malley - ought to be required reading, particularly by those who dismiss such efforts as too costly or unnecessary. Here's the CliffsNotes version: Climate change is real, it's accelerating, it's potentially disastrous, and Maryland, with its hundreds of miles of coastline, wetlands and coastal development, is more vulnerable than most.

The O'Malley administration's aggressive new plan to fight climate change calls for Maryland residents to further cut their energy use or face higher monthly utility bills. The plan, to be released Thursday by Gov. Martin O'Malley, also requires that more of the state's electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. Maryland's goals for reducing greenhouse gases are among the most ambitious in the nation. The plan requires stricter measures than previously proposed to meet the requirement set by the General Assembly in 2009 to cut carbon emissions that scientists say drive climate change.

The present and former owners of a Hagerstown cement plant have agreed to pay a $700,000 fine and beef up emission controls at the facility to settle alleged air pollution violations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday. The proposed federal court consent decree requires Holcim Inc. to install "advanced pollution controls" at the Hagerstown manufacturing facility, which employs about 100 workers. The company, based in Waltham, Mass., also pledged to spend at least $150,000 on replacing an outdated piece of plant equipment with one that emits less pollution.

Regarding Gov. Martin O'Malley's decision to petition the EPA fuel standards on behalf of the Carnival Cruise Line, I urge Carnival to move its operations from Baltimore to Beijing or Somalia ("O'Malley lobbies EPA on fuel rules," June 16). Maryland doesn't need to suck up to any corporation trying to pull off an economic development blackmail scheme on it. It's also clear that the United States doesn't need a future president who is so quick to compromise the state and nation's well being in the name of a big polluter and political contributor.

The latest word on climate change is not good — world emissions of carbon dioxide from energy use rose 1.4 percent last year to set a new record, according to the International Energy Agency. At this pace, the agency reports, global temperatures could rise a startling 9 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, which would be disastrous for all nations. And yet this latest report has received minimal attention in the United States, at least outside the climate science community and its usual advocates.

Last December, an American milestone passed virtually unnoticed. Forty years earlier, Harrison Schmitt became the 12th and last person to walk on the moon. Mr. Schmitt and the 11 men who preceded him - beginning with Neil Armstrong in 1969 - had this in common: All were employees of the United States government. Some have argued that sending men to the moon may not have been the most prudent use of American resources or ingenuity. But the realization of President John F. Kennedy's dream of a U.S. moon walk before the end of the 1960s became a symbol of the scientific and imaginative leadership of this country and what Kennedy termed our "freedom doctrine" during the Cold War. Now, the United States has an opportunity, even an obligation, to mobilize its resources and knowhow to achieve a more practical, and pressing, end. Increasingly under siege by destructive and deadly weather events - wrought, many scientists believe, by man-made climate change - we need to make a national commitment to weather research, including the fields of geo-engineering, weather modification and storm mitigation.

It isn't hard to recognize an example of false economy in the average household budget. The vegetable gardener who spends $500 on supplies to produce $12 in produce, the inexpensive home repair that falls apart in a month or the avid shopper who saves $5 online but pays an extra $20 in shipping and handling. Yet for some reason many of us are blind to the false economy of providing gasoline at the cheapest price possible regardless of its impact on our lives and society. To put it bluntly, humans have been subsidizing the cost of gas by accepting - without direct charge - the air pollution gas-burning vehicles generate.

Mike Tidwell is correct that the evidence for global climate change is indisputable and that carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels and alterations in the earth's ecosystems is the primary cause ("Forecast calls for pain," Feb. 6). Since the carbon already in the atmosphere will persist for a thousand years, we must stop and not merely reduce greenhouse gas emissions if we are to stabilize the current status. I agree that society must put a price on carbon dioxide emissions for the universal harm they do. In so doing, as the price increases, clean, non-carbon energy sources will become competitive in the marketplace.